I've already expressed my views on this subject but more and more detail is coming out and it just gets worse and worse. The rfl want 14 big clubs yet at least 3 clubs will never be big clubs. The exercise is too try and kill off independent clubs and support the big 14. If all CC clubs lose independence by twinning and some of the big 14 go bust and the rfl can't bust a gut to save them then what happens? I'm so glad my club doesn't want to twin.

I think you can forget 14 clubs now - we have had top brass talking 10 and 12 SL clubs.

There are three SL clubs who just can't afford to compete and are on relatively limited budgets for player spend next year, Cas, HKR & Salford. None show any sign of a dual registration tie up with a championship club which I find significant.

I take Padge's point (as always) about a primary need to strengthen clubs through these tie ups whereby resources on and off the pitch can be shared. It's the weaker Championship clubs that are taking the plunge, through necessity.

This probably guarantees survival for them, but you never know one or two may just start to push the noses of the clubs queuing for SL out of joint.

But then again if P & R comes back then we may see ex-SL clubs, top CC clubs and rejuvinated dual reg CC clubs fighting out a very interesting and exciting championship in the coming years.....

I'm referring to the clubs who regularly sit at the top of the Championship Mr. M.

Their position could be wrested from them by "A" teams. Hence "struggle"

Maybe this is Gatcliffe's proposed SL1 and SL2, the SL2 is the "A" teams

I think exactly that, what incentive does it give any club outside super league to try and grow, this system will keep the clubs not wanted by the RFL in super league well and truely in their place and the only places open will be the chosen expansion areas and that track record is very poor.

Infact watch this space, IMO the RFL will be bringing their expansion program closer to the heartlands very very soon has they abandon the likes of Kent.

Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.

Pretty irrelevant point. They will buy nearly a full squad of new players anyway.

I assume that the dual reg clubs have/will abandon any idea of promotion to Superleague, as for them being able to buy nearly a full squad of new professional players, none of the clubs mentioned so far have the money to do anything like that. How much money have York got for buying a professional side?

I assume that the dual reg clubs have/will abandon any idea of promotion to Superleague, as for them being able to buy nearly a full squad of new professional players, none of the clubs mentioned so far have the money to do anything like that. How much money have York got for buying a professional side?

They havent. Until York get their new stadium in 2015 they won't even consider SuperLeague.

So if Fev use DR players next season, like they did this season, have they abandoned their aspirations for SuperLeague too?

2. So if Fev use DR players next season, like they did this season, have they abandoned their aspirations for SuperLeague too?

1. Thanks, that leaves the question how will they get the money acting as Hull's "A" team?

2. Well, with respect Gav you miss the point. The current moves have been dismissed as just a few loan players, Hunslet and Rochdale are just doing what Fev already do.

Eaton doesn't see it that way, he sees two clubs working together to develop a strong SL side and a strong Championship side.

Blackpool Hawk quite rightly stated that the initial purpose of the move was to guarantee Hunslet's survival. But will Rochdale and Hunslet just sit back and be happy with that? Will York be simply happy with "survival" as a result of a proposed Hull tie up (I saw one if not York's last game at SLS before they gave up, can't remember the year). You yourself say that they are chasing a stadium, surely they want to be chasing the Championship Grand Final??

This is what Eaton's eyes are on. That's a taken surely?

No matter how many "tie ups" and "arrangements" are put in place the number of quality players having to step down to Championship won't change much. Featherstone signed lads like Kaye and Manning from Leeds, in the "new order" of things Eaton is looking for those sort of lads to sign at Hunslet.

Powell himself baulks at the idea that the new arrangements will affect his clubs ability to compete for players to stay in pole position for SL. This may not be just the ability for his rivals to "spend more" when you have dual reg players (I appreciate there's some doubt as to this point he makes) but Eaton wants it to extend to Hunslet getting first pick. He wants the next Kaye and Manning to be Hunslet players.

This could in theory lead to clubs with no SL ambition (how can you even qualify when your "joint" academy system is designed to only feed you scraps) replacing independent clubs at the top of the Championship who need to be there to qualify for SL even under a P & R system. Imagine Hunslet winning the Grand Final again and having to decline promotion?

Or do we believe they will throw away the survival link with Leeds and enter SL with no money for a years worth of thumpings?

It's an interesting thought that the Chapionship may see a shift in the balance of power. However I don't believe it will happen because IMHO I don't see crowds rising for clubs who have thrown their lot's in with SL clubs to become "A" teams. Featherstone are likely to still be able to offer better deals than Hunslet.

But I could be wrong, 2,000 crowds may be possible again at Hunslet and other smaller Championship clubs.....

As far as I know, Jack Briscoe was. Andy Ellis was on a month by month loan, not DR. The season before, we in theory had Zak on DR, however in practise, we saw very little of him. Off the top of my head, that's been about it, though I may be mistaken.

As far as I know, Jack Briscoe was. Andy Ellis was on a month by month loan, not DR. The season before, we in theory had Zak on DR, however in practise, we saw very little of him. Off the top of my head, that's been about it, though I may be mistaken.

For me, loans and DR are not the same thing.

in 2010 Fev had Michael Coady on DR, Dan Manning on a season long loan, and Ben Kaye on short loan.in 2011 Fev had Zak Hardaker on DR, Ben GLeadhill and Dave Williams on short loans.in 2012 Fev had Kyle Briggs on a season long loan, and Jack Briscoe and Andy Ellis on short loans.